Will Nadal pass Federer?

[Moxie]

Federer was going to win more on fast grass. No doubt about that. On the other hand, I don’t think Nadal wound have a Wimbledon title. I remember watching Federer at Wimbledon in 2001 and he was amazing. He had the game to play on that surface. The grass was changed in 2002. I don’t understand why people are against surface diversity. With surface diversity, it becomes more challenging to transition from one grand slam to the other, and the greatness of players can be determined by how they adapt to the very different playing conditions.

If Roger was so good on the 2001 grass, why didn't he win it? He was 19. Same age as Rafa when he won a Major on his best surface. He lost to Henman, and the eventual winner was Ivanisavic...for his lone Major win. Of course, I'm giving you a hard time, but I don't see how you get to be so sure how things would have played out differently. First of all, I have yet to hear anyone say they are actually against surface diversity. (OK, except me, in that I hated carpet, and I'm glad it's gone.) And given that Nadal has been so good across his career at being adaptable, and given that he targeted Wimbledon from a young age, who is to say that he wouldn't have adapted a different style earlier in order to win at Wimbledon? You can't take the fantasy of changing something as elemental as the surfaces and be so sure that you can extract results from them. By the same token, you can't take a player as talented as Nadal, or Djokovic, for that matter, and insist that if the conditions were different, that they wouldn't have trained for them differently.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

If Roger was so good on the 2001 grass, why didn't he win it? He was 19. Same age as Rafa when he won a Major on his best surface. He lost to Henman, and the eventual winner was Ivanisavic...for his lone Major win. Of course, I'm giving you a hard time, but I don't see how you get to be so sure how things would have played out differently. First of all, I have yet to hear anyone say they are actually against surface diversity. (OK, except me, in that I hated carpet, and I'm glad it's gone.) And given that Nadal has been so good across his career at being adaptable, and given that he targeted Wimbledon from a young age, who is to say that he wouldn't have adapted a different style earlier in order to win at Wimbledon? You can't take the fantasy of changing something as elemental as the surfaces and be so sure that you can extract results from them. By the same token, you can't take a player as talented as Nadal, or Djokovic, for that matter, and insist that if the conditions were different, that they wouldn't have trained for them differently.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Now, we tend to think that the number of slams won by a player is a monotonically increasing function. But, is that really true. If for example a player tested positive and there was reasonable suspicion that he might have used the substance during several of his wins, can the organizers take the title away. If so, can they give the title to someone else or they can only take the title away.

Petr Korda, who won AO in 1998 tested positive in June 1998 and then quit the game. But, I don't think they took the stuff away.

Same with Meldopova. They never took back any of the GSs she won.

Does anyone know of a precedent where a player can be penalized retroactively due to playing too much.

 

[brokenshoelace]

I didn't say playing on fast surfaces only, but transitioning from one slam to another that plays very differently. There is no logic in saying that playing on fast surfaces equates to being complete. That is why I mentioned surface variety.

So by what logic is Roger and Novak’s relative struggles to transition to clay not count against their “completeness”?

Nobody is disputing that Roger is a more complete player but there’s a lot of fallacies applied to the logic and the undermining of Clay is silly. As if it’s some alien surface.

 

[Jelenafan]

The tireless one likes slow surfaces. That is why he has 12 FO's. And you know why he overachieved at Wimbledon and the US Open. No hypotheticals here. With fast surfaces, the tireless one has no Wimbledon and most likely no US Open.

So “overachieved” equates to Rafas wins in your world. Let’s not mince words then, The Ancient one by that standard definitely overachieved with his one French Open Title.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Nadal has actually underachieved due to his many injuries and setbacks... Missing the 2009 WB when he won 2008 and 2010? Missing the 2012 and 2014 USO when he won the 2013 USO and has been the most dominant player there this decade? How about having to withdraw during the tournaments like 2016 RG and 2018 USO? And don't get me started on his bad luck at the AO with his many injuries!

This doesn't even take into account that he had to comeback every time and try to work his way back into form which usually affected him for the following slams... And all these setbacks also cost him to lose many weeks at no.1. Meanwhile Federer and Djokovic had the luxury of playing injury free and not missing slams for pretty much their whole prime years.

Nadal would have had the record a long time ago based on talent alone! But Nadal will STILL end up with the slam record regardless of the fact that he underachieved due to his bad luck!

 

[Moxie]

Now, we tend to think that the number of slams won by a player is a monotonically increasing function. But, is that really true. If for example a player tested positive and there was reasonable suspicion that he might have used the substance during several of his wins, can the organizers take the title away. If so, can they give the title to someone else or they can only take the title away.

Petr Korda, who won AO in 1998 tested positive in June 1998 and then quit the game. But, I don't think they took the stuff away.

Same with Meldopova. They never took back any of the GSs she won.

Does anyone know of a precedent where a player can be penalized retroactively due to playing too much.

The drug that Sharapova was taking wasn't illegal when she won her Majors, so it makes sense that they wouldn't be stripped from her. As to Roger, don't worry...I already told you they'll never expose him.

 

[Bonaca]

Nadal has actually underachieved due to his many injuries and setbacks... Missing the 2009 WB when he won 2008 and 2010? Missing the 2012 and 2014 USO when he won the 2013 USO and has been the most dominant player there this decade? How about having to withdraw during the tournaments like 2016 RG and 2018 USO? And don't get me started on his bad luck at the AO with his many injuries!

This doesn't even take into account that he had to comeback every time and try to work his way back into form which usually affected him for the following slams... And all these setbacks also cost him to lose many weeks at no.1. Meanwhile Federer and Djokovic had the luxury of playing injury free and not missing slams for pretty much their whole prime years.

Nadal would have had the record a long time ago based on talent alone! But Nadal will STILL end up with the slam record regardless of the fact that he underachieved due to his bad luck!

That is no underachievement , his injuries are playstyle dependent, it’s the price for this kind of unreal physicality. One could say he could be happy that he wasn’t injured much more. Always to sides of the medal and the viewing point.

He is less talented than the other two, looking overall. Serve, shotmaking, return of serve, intelligence ......
He is superior in his physical abilities, and it looks like this endless running , bringing balls back and stretching rallies is the most dominant „Talent“ for success. Not impressive but effective.

 

[Front242]

Nadal has actually underachieved due to his many injuries and setbacks... Missing the 2009 WB when he won 2008 and 2010? Missing the 2012 and 2014 USO when he won the 2013 USO and has been the most dominant player there this decade? How about having to withdraw during the tournaments like 2016 RG and 2018 USO? And don't get me started on his bad luck at the AO with his many injuries!

This doesn't even take into account that he had to comeback every time and try to work his way back into form which usually affected him for the following slams... And all these setbacks also cost him to lose many weeks at no.1. Meanwhile Federer and Djokovic had the luxury of playing injury free and not missing slams for pretty much their whole prime years.

Nadal would have had the record a long time ago based on talent alone! But Nadal will STILL end up with the slam record regardless of the fact that he underachieved due to his bad luck!

You make things out to be far more dramatic than they are with regard to Nadal's injuries like so many Nadal drama queens. Federer had a bad back pretty much all of 2013, a year full of crap results for him and since you're mostly focusing on the USO: Federer's back was screwed at the USO 2013, 2017 he was the player to beat all year and stupid scheduling at Montreal caused him to enter with a bad back (dumbest move of his career), 2019 his back deserted him in the semi when he was the favourite with Djokovic out and he missed 2016 completely due to reoccurring knee injury from the SF of Wimbledon 2016 where he fell flat on his face out of nowhere when his knee went from under him. That's 3 US Opens impacted with back injuries and one missed completely and 2 Wimbledons he was in bad shape. Stop making out that poor Nadal has such bad luck as they've all had bad luck in their careers.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

You make things out to be far more dramatic than they are with regard to Nadal's injuries like so many Nadal drama queens. Federer had a bad back pretty much all of 2013, a year full of crap results for him and since you're mostly focusing on the USO: Federer's back was screwed at the USO 2013, 2017 he was the player to beat all year and stupid scheduling at Montreal caused him to enter with a bad back (dumbest move of his career), 2019 his back deserted him in the semi when he was the favourite with Djokovic out and he missed 2016 completely due to reoccurring knee injury from the SF of Wimbledon 2016 where he fell flat on his face out of nowhere when his knee went from under him. That's 3 US Opens impacted with back injuries and one missed completely and 2 Wimbledons he was in bad shape. Stop making out that poor Nadal has such bad luck as they've all had bad luck in their careers.

Stop trolling. Federer had the luxury of playing in 65 consecutive slams between 2000-2016 which was a record. Meanwhile Nadal’s longest streak is his current one of 13. He missed slams in 2004, 2006, 2009, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016.., And that doesn’t even account for the slams he played but was injured in like 2010 AO, 2014 AO, 2016 RG, 2018 USO, etc. Or the ones where he was making a comeback and trying to regain his form. Go get some help for comparing Nadal’s and Federer’s setbacks. :cuckoo:

 

[Front242]

Stop trolling. Federer had the luxury of playing in 65 consecutive slams between 2000-2016 which was a record. Meanwhile Nadal’s longest streak is his current one of 13. He missed slams in 2004, 2006, 2009, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016.., And that doesn’t even account for the slams he played but was injured in like 2010 AO, 2014 AO, 2016 RG, 2018 USO, etc. Or the ones where he was making a comeback and trying to regain his form. Go get some help for comparing Nadal’s and Federer’s setbacks. :cuckoo:

A troll telling me to stop trolling haha. Good one. You and the other poster with Nadal in his nick have been doing nothing but that on practically every damn thread since the final. I said be happy with the win and stop trolling to Nadalgoat and it kicked off an embarrassing barrage of shit from AP and Carol that I was accused of starting. Again, stop with the drama queen crap because Nadal could have played in many of the ones he skipped, he just chose not to. Most famous one is the AO 2013.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

A troll telling me to stop trolling haha. Good one. You and the other poster with Nadal in his nick have been doing nothing but that on practically every damn thread since the final. I said be happy with the win and stop trolling to Nadalgoat and it kicked off an embarrassing barrage of shit from AP and Carol that I was accused of starting. Again, stop with the drama queen crap because Nadal could have played in many of the ones he skipped, he just chose not to. Most famous one is the AO 2013.

I have to give you props because you are managing to write posts that are a perfect blend of crap and tears, and that’s not an easy thing to do.

 

[Moxie]

You make things out to be far more dramatic than they are with regard to Nadal's injuries like so many Nadal drama queens. Federer had a bad back pretty much all of 2013, a year full of crap results for him and since you're mostly focusing on the USO: Federer's back was screwed at the USO 2013, 2017 he was the player to beat all year and stupid scheduling at Montreal caused him to enter with a bad back (dumbest move of his career), 2019 his back deserted him in the semi when he was the favourite with Djokovic out and he missed 2016 completely due to reoccurring knee injury from the SF of Wimbledon 2016 where he fell flat on his face out of nowhere when his knee went from under him. That's 3 US Opens impacted with back injuries and one missed completely and 2 Wimbledons he was in bad shape. Stop making out that poor Nadal has such bad luck as they've all had bad luck in their careers.

Oh, come on, Front. You know that Rafa's injury issues started earlier and have kept him off the tour more. And caused him to miss a fair number of Majors. Yes, Roger's back has been some bad luck too, late career. And Novak has had some of late, as well. But the injury plagued one of the 3 has been Rafa. That's not drama, that's quantifiable fact.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

Oh, come on, Front. You know that Rafa's injury issues started earlier and have kept him off the tour more. And caused him to miss a fair number of Majors. Yes, Roger's back has been some bad luck too, late career. And Novak has had some of late, as well. But the injury plagued one of the 3 has been Rafa. That's not drama, that's quantifiable fact.

I can't wait to see what he comes up with next... Maybe that Federer has been as unlucky as Monica Seles. :cuckoo:

 

[Front242]

Oh, come on, Front. You know that Rafa's injury issues started earlier and have kept him off the tour more. And caused him to miss a fair number of Majors. Yes, Roger's back has been some bad luck too, late career. And Novak has had some of late, as well. But the injury plagued one of the 3 has been Rafa. That's not drama, that's quantifiable fact.

He was specifically talking about the USO and Federer has 4 of his impacted there in recent years. Then he goes and boasts stupidly that Nadal has been the most dominant player there the last few years. Well duh. If one of the main opponents had a bad back in 3 and missed 1 and the other missed 2017 and had to retire in the 4th round this year with a shoulder injury what does anyone expect? Nadal chose not to play in Wimbledon 2009 also btw.

 

[Bonaca]

I can't wait to see what he comes up with next... Maybe that Federer has been as unlucky as Monica Seles. :cuckoo:

The case of Monica is the only real bad luck, I’m still sorry for her. What a pleasure it was to watch her beating Graf regularly.
I never watched WTA the same way since then. I was a fan of her.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

He was specifically talking about the USO and Federer has 4 of his impacted there in recent years. Then he goes and boasts stupidly that Nadal has been the most dominant player there the last few years. Well duh. If one of the main opponents had a bad back in 3 and missed 1 and the other missed 2017 and had to retire in the 4th round this year with a shoulder injury what does anyone expect? Nadal chose not to play in Wimbledon 2009 also btw.

No matter how you want to twist things Nadal still comes on top. Nadal has won 4 USO titles this decade, so Federer had plenty of chances to stop him and didn't. Most of the time it was because he had match points in the previous match and couldn't convert. Even during the years where Nadal wasn't there like 2012, 2014 or retiring in 2018, Federer couldn't win. Meanwhile Nadal managed to beat Federer for his AO title and is 3-1 against him there. He also managed to beat Federer in a Wimbledon final. And at the French Open Federer is 0-6 against Nadal and the only year he managed to win it was when he was able to avoid Nadal. Stop with your nonsense.

 

[Front242]

The case of Monica is the only real bad luck, I’m still sorry for her. What a pleasure it was to watch her beating Graf regularly.
I never watched WTA the same way since then. I was a fan of her.

Great player alright but I've a feeling she started off the whole grunting crap in tennis which is not one bit cool. Genuinely can't recall anyone quite as bad before her and obviously now there are tons way worse on the both the ATP and WTA.

 

[Bonaca]

Great player alright but I've a feeling she started off the whole grunting crap in tennis which is not one bit cool. Genuinely can't recall anyone quite as bad before her and obviously now there are tons way worse on the both the ATP and WTA.

Funny How different meanings could be. For me she brought new flavour in the game with her power tennis, double handed on both wings. But this wasn’t the main reason for me to like her.
Boy I loved it how she smashed that arrogant german ****!.
The only highlight on the women side after that was the „one hit wonder“ Iva Majoli winning the French!

 

[Front242]

No matter how you want to twist things Nadal still comes on top. Nadal has won 4 USO titles this decade, so Federer had plenty of chances to stop him and didn't. Most of the time it was because he had match points in the previous match and couldn't convert. Even during the years where Nadal wasn't there like 2012, 2014 or retiring in 2018, Federer couldn't win. Meanwhile Nadal managed to beat Federer for his AO title and is 3-1 against him there. He also managed to beat Federer in a Wimbledon final. And at the French Open Federer is 0-6 against Nadal and the only year he managed to win it was when he was able to avoid Nadal. Stop with your nonsense.

There's no denying Federer has blown plenty of matches at the USO but he's had 3 injury plagued ones in recent years and one missed 1 and was gonna be favourite in 2017 before hurting his back and 2nd favourite after Djokovic's exit this year. One of those AO wins in 2013 was during Federer's atrocious 2013 when he was losing to everyone and their dog with a bad back. 2009 was just a blown opportunity and I can't even remember the other off the top of my head. We saw, however, that with a fast court in 2017 and no mental baggage the result was the complete opposite so you should be happy he played like a wuss in the AO 2009 and for 2.5 sets at Wimbledon.

Speaking of nonsense, Nadal was so desperate to win Wimbledon in 2010 we all know what he did against Petzschner and of course, he couldn't lose to poor old Roger at the French Open so what does he do down 2-5 in the first set in 2011? Good old sporting Rafa. You want nonsense, you got it right there. Did the same thing this year at Wimbledon before Roger served for the match. If he's as good as you make out then he shouldn't need to resort to this...but clearly he's not because he does it.